On Mon, 04/27 18:28, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > While it is obvious that cpu_physical_memory_get_dirty returns true even if > a single page is dirty, the same is not true for > cpu_physical_memory_get_clean; > one would expect that it returns true only if all the pages are clean, but > it actually looks for even one clean page. (By contrast, the caller of that > function, cpu_physical_memory_range_includes_clean, has a good name). > > To clarify, rename the function to cpu_physical_memory_all_dirty and return > true if _all_ the pages are dirty. This is the opposite of the previous > meaning, because "all are 1" is the same as "not (any is 0)", so we have to > modify cpu_physical_memory_range_includes_clean as well. > > Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Fam Zheng <f...@redhat.com> Then maybe we can rename cpu_physical_memory_is_clean to cpu_physical_memory_has_clean, or as you suggested, cpu_physical_memory_needs_notdirty (but wait, what is 'notdirty'? :), for a similar reason. Fam
